Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Why Any President Would Have Spent Like Obama
US News & World Report ^ | May 31, 2012 | by Rick Newman

Posted on 05/31/2012 5:11:54 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

The latest digression in the presidential campaign between Mitt Romney and Barack Obama is a fresh argument about government spending that took place in 2008 and 2009. Should it count as Obama's spending? Or that of his predecessor, George W. Bush? The answer, apparently, will determine whether Obama is an "old-school liberal" addicted to spending, as Romney insists, or a more thrifty leader carefully husbanding taxpayer dollars.

I can't prove it, but my contention is that any president, of any party, would have approved the bank and housing-agency bailouts and other stimulus measures that Bush approved, and even Obama's $800 billion stimulus plan, which passed in 2009. It's easy to forget, but the economy was on the verge of free-falling into a depression back then, and there was intense pressure on the government to prevent that. Politicians get elected to do what the voters want, and voters wanted somebody to stop the bleeding and save the economy.

I'd go as far as to say that any president would have approved the 2009 auto bailouts, too.

In my view, Obama's true spending habits should be judged from the middle of 2009 onward. That would obviously include his signature healthcare-reform law, a series of temporary tax cuts and subsidies for the unemployed, plus a bunch of other stimulus measures that Obama proposed but Congress denied. Obama is clearly a man who prefers government solutions to many problems, but so did a lot of others during the financial crisis, when there didn't appear to be any other solutions. Voters shouldn't punish the president for helping save the economy when it needed saving.

(Excerpt) Read more at usnews.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Editorial; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: failure; obamanomics; porkulus; socialism
...It's easy to forget, but the economy was on the verge of free-falling into a depression back then...

I'm sick of this, "we didn't know how bad the economy was" message from the socialists. They passed Porkulus in the first 30 days, thought massive spending would solve everything, then jumped headlong into the Healthcare disaster. Obama is an incompetent true-believer Marxist. He could care less about economic growth, he seized government control of 20% of our GDP. His administration then went on to regulate commerce and liberty in a way that ensures a stagnant economy.

This Statist must GO!

1 posted on 05/31/2012 5:12:02 PM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

....When you waste trillions, stealing a few billion is easy.


2 posted on 05/31/2012 5:14:43 PM PDT by Doogle (((USAF.68-73..8th TFW Ubon Thailand..never store a threat you should have eliminated)))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Why Any President Would Have Spent Like Obama

When the facts aren't going you way, just make something up and print it as news.

3 posted on 05/31/2012 5:21:59 PM PDT by Steely Tom (If the Constitution can be a living document, I guess a corporation can be a person.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
""Why Any President Would Have Spent Like Obama""

spe·cious[ spshəss ]ADJECTIVE 1. apparently true but actually false: appearing to be true but really false = "a specious claim"

2. deceptively attractive: superficially attractive but actually of no real interest or value

'nuff said
4 posted on 05/31/2012 5:25:28 PM PDT by Uncle Ike (Rope is cheap, and there are lots of trees...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Why Any President Would Have Spent Like Obama?

why it helps destroy America, why else?

5 posted on 05/31/2012 5:28:20 PM PDT by MrPiper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I can't prove it, but my contention is that any president, of any party, would have approved the bank and housing-agency bailouts and other stimulus measures that Bush approved, and even Obama's $800 billion stimulus plan, which passed in 2009. It's easy to forget, but the economy was on the verge of free-falling into a depression back then, and there was intense pressure on the government to prevent that. Politicians get elected to do what the voters want, and voters wanted somebody to stop the bleeding and save the economy.

This is ridiculous. First of all, that's a half truth on Bush "approving" those bailouts - Obama also holds culpability with his "Aye" vote in the Senate which helped get it to Bush's desk for signature. And there is more to the stimulus than just the dollar figure - much of that spending was on complete junk - not even what could be called pork. The infrastructure improvements may have had some nominal effect on the economy, but if that was all that was done, the price tage would have been what, $50 billion? The rest was a complete waste - studying ants in Africa, sending jobs to China, Solyndra, etc. The debt it added and the compounding interest has been a net negative for the economy overall not only in the present but will be a continuing drag on the economy for many years to come, as the CBO head has admitted.

6 posted on 05/31/2012 5:33:59 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
spending is one thing, what it's spent ON, is another...
7 posted on 05/31/2012 5:40:09 PM PDT by Chode (American Hedonist - *DTOM* -ww- NO Pity for the LAZY)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

This is one of the magazines I don’t read in a doctors office and this article confirms I made the right decision. The warning leaflets on drugs are more interesting and informative.


8 posted on 05/31/2012 5:45:10 PM PDT by trubolotta
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Alternate title: “What any reporter would write to try to save Obama”.


9 posted on 05/31/2012 6:01:31 PM PDT by jdsteel (Give me freedom, not more government.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Republican Wildcat

I agree. In 2009, you know what I saw from the ‘Stimulus’ shovel-ready jobs? The only thing?

Road signs.


10 posted on 05/31/2012 6:22:54 PM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spiritui Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Rick Newman, standing in a long line of media clowns taking their turns smooching Obamugabe’s arse. Wear that lipstick thick, Rick.


11 posted on 05/31/2012 6:23:13 PM PDT by SoFloFreeper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Doogle

The US is spending $1.40 for every $1 income.

Just like the family in 2008 riding a wave of false prosperity funded by credit cards and helocs.

Two luxury SUVs on lease and a 4000 sf McMansion with zero equity.


12 posted on 05/31/2012 6:26:56 PM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

US Snooze....figures.

However, W was a big spender, too. All the DC pols are addicted to deficits. Makes me sad, the world fiat economy requires deficit spending, whether at the governmental level or at my level via credit card spending which I don’t do.

The frugal saver is just screwed in today’s world, Bernake is doing all he can to devalue my savings so Obama’s (and Bush’s) deficits appear to shrink.


13 posted on 05/31/2012 6:27:07 PM PDT by citizen (Obama blames:Arab Spring,Banks,Big Oil,Bush,Ceos,Coal,Euro Zone,FNC,Jpn Tsunami,T Party,Wall St,You)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
The entire article is a farce or at least it should be.

To say that our economic condition was worse than it was at any time is ludicrous. The entire economy was in full free fall collapse in 1920. The response from the Harding and Coolidge was the exact opposite. They slashed spending and government, They slashed taxes. The economy quickly roared back to massive growth and massive increases in government revenues.

In 1981 The country was in a much worse recession. Reagan followed the lead of Warren and Calvin and slashed taxes, regulations, and unleashed Americas economic might, once again a massive wave of growth, employment and government revenue occurred.

The constant rewriting of history to distort the facts is despicable.

14 posted on 05/31/2012 6:36:04 PM PDT by Jim from C-Town (The government is rarely benevolent, often malevolent and never benign!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: citizen

I still see this glib indictment of bush as a root problem of conservatism.

Bush’s spending was indeed distinct. The democrats did indeed seek to incite a financial bank panic in fall 2008. In January 2007 democrats in congress such as Obama deregulated the GSEs Fannie and Freddie to pop the real estate bubble.

Despite these adverse partisan acts to bring the election of Obama bush expended only half of the TARP funds. Bush’s stipulations on TARP are the height of fiscal conservatism.

The funds were specifically targeted to banks in crisis.

The funds had to be paid back.

The funds had to be paid back with interest.

What govt programs have ever done this?

All the bush funds have been paid back. The same is not true of obamas expenditures.


15 posted on 05/31/2012 7:15:08 PM PDT by lonestar67 (I remember when unemployment was 4.7 percent)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I can't prove it, but my contention is that any president, of any party, would have approved the bank and housing-agency bailouts and other stimulus measures that Bush approved,

I think that is true because there is almost no difference between a democrat and a republican politician.

16 posted on 05/31/2012 7:24:40 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lonestar67
I still see this glib indictment of bush as a root problem of conservatism.

Well that is simply nonsense since Bush was never a Conservative.

17 posted on 05/31/2012 7:26:35 PM PDT by DManA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Rats had super majorities in both the house and senate starting in 2007.
When did the recession start? 2007. Who was in the Senate then ? Breakit Obama.


18 posted on 05/31/2012 8:25:27 PM PDT by stylin19a (Obama - The Man Who Shot Liberty Valance)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Historic unemployment, unprecedented trillion dollar deficits and no budget. The dims fiscal negligence really has no parallel in the 230 year history of this country. Too argue that any president would have behaved as the kenyan did is farcical.


19 posted on 05/31/2012 9:22:59 PM PDT by lodi90
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Leftists always try to rewrite history.

This is a particularly ignorant attempt.

20 posted on 06/01/2012 6:04:18 AM PDT by skeeter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Cloward Piven.
Collapse the system so it can be replaced with a better one.
Never let a crisis go to waste.

This the driving ideology of the dimrat party since they took over the house and senate. Once they got one of their own in the White House it was a done deal.

We will suffer because of it. Part of the plan.

Never forget who brought us this national nightmare, the dimrat party and their media. May they all rot in hell.


21 posted on 06/01/2012 6:34:28 AM PDT by Texas resident (November 6 - Vote Against obama)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I think Rick Newman is confused. I can’t say for certain what some other hypothetical president may have done but one thing is certain, everything the Obummer administration has done has had negative results for this country and much of the rest of the world and this is deliberate. The puppet masters who pull the strings on this farce of a government know full well what they are doing and what they are doing is intentionally creating a depression to make the thirties look like a Sunday afternoon picnic by a babbling mountain stream.


22 posted on 06/01/2012 7:16:18 AM PDT by RipSawyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: nascarnation

Your comparison is excellent. I have added a couple of “extras” that were common out here in Californicator Land:

The US is spending $1.40 for every $1 income.

Just like the family in 2008 riding a wave of false prosperity funded by credit cards and helocs.

Two luxury SUVs on lease and a 4000 sf McMansion with zero equity.

One or two vacation homes posing as rentals with $ losses every year.

Maxed out home equity, seconds and thirds on their McMansions and vacation homes.

Expensive Personal lifestyle trainers showing up several times a week to make the debtors appear to be beautiful and smart.

Expensive family vacations with adult children, grandkids, nephews and nieces on cruises or at McFantasy Parks, again paid temporarily for by borrowed money.

Children, who shouldn’t be in college or private schools costing 5 figures each year for worthless faux education.


23 posted on 06/01/2012 10:27:17 AM PDT by Grampa Dave (ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION IS DESTROYING AMERICA-LOOK AT WHAT IT DID TO THE WHITE HOUSE!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: Grampa Dave

Well said, it’s sad to watch.
I fear for my grandchildren’s future....


24 posted on 06/01/2012 10:31:19 AM PDT by nascarnation
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
When did the change the Constitution?

Presidents don't spend. They don't write or create legislation that makes budgets and spending Bills. They can "propose" such but its Congress that deals with Spending. The Democrat controlled Congress went on a Spending Spree in 2009 1nd 2010. Obama Gleefully signed the bills into law.

Now the MSM is trying to deflect the fact that it was the Democrats who made this current spending mess. (not to be confused with the previous spending mess the Republican controlled congress made and President Bush Gleefully signed into law.)

25 posted on 06/01/2012 10:38:20 AM PDT by Mad Dawgg (If you're going to deny my 1st Amendment rights then I must proceed to the 2nd one...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: combat_boots

Well...they had to pay someone to make and put up the signs, you know... :-) (Of course after that they had no further value.)

The cost of those signs could have funded several more large infrastructure improvements...but of course that is not ultimately what the stimulus was all about.


26 posted on 06/04/2012 5:06:50 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: stylin19a

Obama and Biden both.


27 posted on 06/04/2012 5:08:33 PM PDT by Republican Wildcat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Why? So they could enrich their cronies..........follow the money.


28 posted on 06/04/2012 5:11:20 PM PDT by The_Media_never_lie (The First Bystander must be removed!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson